Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

dingbat wrote: I don't think there are many cities where you don't need a car to the same level as manhattan. The lifestyle there is very different than, say, Los Angeles, where you any really get by without one.

i guess what people really mean by this is that there is practically no stigma to not having a car in manhattan, compared to other cities. that's a fair point.

dingbat wrote: I don't think there are many cities where you don't need a car to the same level as manhattan. The lifestyle there is very different than, say, Los Angeles, where you any really get by without one.

i guess what people really mean by this is that there is practically no stigma to not having a car in manhattan, compared to other cities. that's a fair point.

Not just a stigma. Having a car in NY is a major hastle. I know directors and partners who don't own a car.

dingbat wrote: I don't think there are many cities where you don't need a car to the same level as manhattan. The lifestyle there is very different than, say, Los Angeles, where you any really get by without one.

i guess what people really mean by this is that there is practically no stigma to not having a car in manhattan, compared to other cities. that's a fair point.

If having a car in Manhattan cost the same amount in parking, gas, insurance, etc... that is does in another major city like Chicago or DC then everyone who made 150k+ would own one. Just because having a car isn't always necessary doesn't make it inexplicable.

Blessedassurance wrote:the costs of having a car in manhattan is greater than almost everywhere else

why on earth would you have a car in manhattan?

that's my point. you don't "need" a car in a lot of major cities either. i don't get the complaints about apples-to-apples comparisons. the calculation (even if not entirely accurate) is about what it takes to live at similar levels (to the extent possible) in different cities. ignoring of course intangibles and other subjective stuff like "best city in america", "culture" etc.

I don't think there are many cities where you don't need a car to the same level as manhattan. The lifestyle there is very different than, say, Los Angeles, where you any really get by without one.

LA is especially shitty though. There aren't many cities, true, but there aren't many cities with biglaw jobs period, and a few others are as "carless" as Manhattan. People in Chicago don't have cars because they need them, they have them because they want to and because they can reasonably afford to.

IAFG wrote: LA is especially shitty though. There aren't many cities, true, but there aren't many cities with biglaw jobs period, and a few others are as "carless" as Manhattan. People in Chicago don't have cars because they need them, they have them because they want to and because they can reasonably afford to.

This. The same is true for a lot of places like Atlanta, Seattle, Dallas etc. As previously stated, you could live in the "action center" of dallas at a spacious apartment within walking distance of your work place and the party center at an amount that is equal to or half of what it will cost you to share an apartment at a similar location in mfh.

also, people get paid 160 grand starting in dallas, houston, seattle etc., not that one needs to start at 160.

IAFG wrote: LA is especially shitty though. There aren't many cities, true, but there aren't many cities with biglaw jobs period, and a few others are as "carless" as Manhattan. People in Chicago don't have cars because they need them, they have them because they want to and because they can reasonably afford to.

This. The same is true for a lot of places like Atlanta, Seattle, Dallas etc. As previously stated, you could live in the "action center" of dallas at a spacious apartment within walking distance of your work place and the party center at an amount that is equal to or half of what it will cost you to share an apartment at a similar location in mfh.

also, people get paid 160 grand starting in dallas, houston, seattle etc., not that one needs to start at 160.

I live in Atlanta and you NEED a car. It is difficult to get around the Atlanta area. Transportation is VERY spotty here. Also, people don't have to live in NYC.

Also, I have family who work in NYC, but they just live outside of NYC and just commute to work there. That cuts costs drastically.

ph14 wrote:Chicago - 1.192 (The $100,000 median in Chicago surprised me. I thought it would have been a bit higher and thus end up higher on the buying power rankings.)

I don't think it's accurate. Basically all the large law firms pay $160k /year in Chicago. I think they must have screwed up somewhere with that calculation (e.g. factoring in gvt organizations and smaller law firms that are listed in NALP) -- I mean, seriously, there's no fucking way the average biglaw salary in Chicago is the same as it is in Detroit (just look at the salary figures on NALP for 10 minutes and you'll see that).

bdubs wrote:

Blessedassurance wrote:

dingbat wrote: I don't think there are many cities where you don't need a car to the same level as manhattan. The lifestyle there is very different than, say, Los Angeles, where you any really get by without one.

i guess what people really mean by this is that there is practically no stigma to not having a car in manhattan, compared to other cities. that's a fair point.

If having a car in Manhattan cost the same amount in parking, gas, insurance, etc... that is does in another major city like Chicago or DC then everyone who made 150k+ would own one. Just because having a car isn't always necessary doesn't make it inexplicable.

Yup, I think the cost is the biggest reason people don't have cars in Manhattan. Drop parking prices in Manhattan down from the $500 /month to $75 /month (or even $200 /month), and I guarantee a lot more people would have cars. Paying $500 /month to park a fucking car is pretty asinine... And I've seen garages go up to $1200 /month in manhattan -- that's more than the cost of rent in a lot of cities.

IAFG wrote:

dingbat wrote:

Blessedassurance wrote:

dingbat wrote:why on earth would you have a car in manhattan?

that's my point. you don't "need" a car in a lot of major cities either. i don't get the complaints about apples-to-apples comparisons. the calculation (even if not entirely accurate) is about what it takes to live at similar levels (to the extent possible) in different cities. ignoring of course intangibles and other subjective stuff like "best city in america", "culture" etc.

I don't think there are many cities where you don't need a car to the same level as manhattan. The lifestyle there is very different than, say, Los Angeles, where you any really get by without one.

LA is especially shitty though. There aren't many cities, true, but there aren't many cities with biglaw jobs period, and a few others are as "carless" as Manhattan. People in Chicago don't have cars because they need them, they have them because they want to and because they can reasonably afford to.

Focusing on your HOMETOWN market is a totally different thing and every single law student should do that. My thoughts were more along the lines of people who want to go to places like Atlanta/the Texas markets/Chicago because they're "cool" and "cheap" when there just aren't a ton of jobs there (especially Chicago; it's competitive-as-fuck even though it's a great place to live).

Did you just call Atlanta cool?

I've lived here the last 20 years and almost everyone I went to school with got the hell out as soon as possible.

XxSpyKEx wrote:Yup, I think the cost is the biggest reason people don't have cars in Manhattan. Drop parking prices in Manhattan down from the $500 /month to $75 /month (or even $200 /month), and I guarantee a lot more people would have cars. Paying $500 /month to park a fucking car is pretty asinine... And I've seen garages go up to $1200 /month in manhattan -- that's more than the cost of rent in a lot of cities.

I know plenty of people who could easily afford a car, but don't, and cost has nothing to do with it. Manhattan is one of the few places where there's no real reason to own a car. Unless you're frequently driving out of the city (e.g. a sales person, or owning a second home on the shore or in the woods that you go to just about every weekend), it's cheaper to rent a car the few times you need one.Even if it were free to park, I wouldn't own a car living in the city. It just doesn't make sense.

Focusing on your HOMETOWN market is a totally different thing and every single law student should do that. My thoughts were more along the lines of people who want to go to places like Atlanta/the Texas markets/Chicago because they're "cool" and "cheap" when there just aren't a ton of jobs there (especially Chicago; it's competitive-as-fuck even though it's a great place to live).

Did you just call Atlanta cool?

I've lived here the last 20 years and almost everyone I went to school with got the hell out as soon as possible.

Atlanta is not cool.

"Cool" is in quotes for a reason. A lot of people think these are cool cities or different cities or whatever. I've only visited Atlanta like twice, so I really don't know how good/bad it is (except that the traffic is atrocious and that is saying something).

Also, I love driving and having a car in Manhattan is totally unnecessary no matter what the price.

Focusing on your HOMETOWN market is a totally different thing and every single law student should do that. My thoughts were more along the lines of people who want to go to places like Atlanta/the Texas markets/Chicago because they're "cool" and "cheap" when there just aren't a ton of jobs there (especially Chicago; it's competitive-as-fuck even though it's a great place to live).

Just so you know, the Houston legal market has done much better than most markets. So, Texas can be cool, cheap, and does have a fair number of jobs.

One might start at $140,000 rather than $160,000 or the salary bumps in later years might not be as large, but without state and city income taxes the take-home pay will still be greater.

keg411 wrote:How many SA positions are available in Houston every year? I doubt they have more than DC/Chicago, which are both dwarfed by NYC.

Fair point. I didn't do my summer in Houston, so I don't know how many SA positions there are.

Baker Botts's NALP listing says it had 27 SA's in 2010, 35 in 2011, and "expected" 55 in 2012.

Vinson & Elkins had 53 SA's in 2010, 58 in 2011, and "expected" 58 in 2012.

I am almost certain that's firmwide.

I don't know about BB, but I was told V&E was hiring more than 10 1ls in Houston, which meshes with this NALP hiring grid that has them hiring 50 2Ls just in Houston. I'm not sure where the discrepancy is coming from, but it doesn't seem likely that they only hire 8 2Ls between Dallas, New York, DC and Austin.

keg411 wrote:How many SA positions are available in Houston every year? I doubt they have more than DC/Chicago, which are both dwarfed by NYC.

Fair point. I didn't do my summer in Houston, so I don't know how many SA positions there are.

Baker Botts's NALP listing says it had 27 SA's in 2010, 35 in 2011, and "expected" 55 in 2012.

Vinson & Elkins had 53 SA's in 2010, 58 in 2011, and "expected" 58 in 2012.

I am almost certain that's firmwide.

I don't know about BB, but I was told V&E was hiring more than 10 1ls in Houston, which meshes with this NALP hiring grid that has them hiring 50 2Ls just in Houston. I'm not sure where the discrepancy is coming from, but it doesn't seem likely that they only hire 8 2Ls between Dallas, New York, DC and Austin.

In the past, NALP hiring grids have failed to distinguish between offices even when they're labeled that way, but my lack of familiarity with TX might be showing.

XxSpyKEx wrote:Yup, I think the cost is the biggest reason people don't have cars in Manhattan. Drop parking prices in Manhattan down from the $500 /month to $75 /month (or even $200 /month), and I guarantee a lot more people would have cars. Paying $500 /month to park a fucking car is pretty asinine... And I've seen garages go up to $1200 /month in manhattan -- that's more than the cost of rent in a lot of cities.

I know plenty of people who could easily afford a car, but don't, and cost has nothing to do with it. Manhattan is one of the few places where there's no real reason to own a car. Unless you're frequently driving out of the city (e.g. a sales person, or owning a second home on the shore or in the woods that you go to just about every weekend), it's cheaper to rent a car the few times you need one.

Riggghhtt. lol.

I do see your point re: not needing a car in Manhattan. But if it were cheaper and you wanted to leave NYC ever so often (say, e.g., twice a month), you're telling me you still wouldn't prefer to just have your own car, and not have to worry about having to rent one every single time you need one? I've lived in Chicago and DC, and you definitely don't need a car in either city, and in fact, it's kind of a pain in the ass dealing with a car (especially in DC), but I think it's much more difficult to get around when you want to leave the city (i.e. there is public transportation, but it's a hassle, such as having to deal with buses that suck at following a schedule, or sometimes showing up at all). And there is a lot of stuff outside of both of those cities that's worthwhile doing and seeing if you have a car (don't think I would have gone through the hassle for most of it if I had to rent a car to do those things). I don't know about NYC though (I hear Jersey is a shithole and I suppose there might not be very much around NYC).

XxSpyKEx wrote:I do see your point re: not needing a car in Manhattan. But if it were cheaper and you wanted to leave NYC ever so often (say, e.g., twice a month),

why would you need (or want) to leave that often?

you're telling me you still wouldn't prefer to just have your own car, and not have to worry about having to rent one every single time you need one?

i do know people who leave that often, and they own a car

I've lived in Chicago and DC, and you definitely don't need a car in either city, and in fact, it's kind of a pain in the ass dealing with a car (especially in DC), but I think it's much more difficult to get around when you want to leave the city (i.e. there is public transportation, but it's a hassle, such as having to deal with buses that suck at following a schedule, or sometimes showing up at all).

NY public transportation is excellent, and having visited both Chicago and DC, I don't think they compare (but haven't spent enough time in either to be certain about it)

And there is a lot of stuff outside of both of those cities that's worthwhile doing and seeing if you have a car

there are far fewer reasons to leave NY, and the common ones are quite well-connected

(don't think I would have gone through the hassle for most of it if I had to rent a car to do those things). I don't know about NYC though (I hear Jersey is a shithole and I suppose there might not be very much around NYC).

parts of Jersey are a shithole, other parts are quite nice. Thing is, I have friends who've lived in NY and DC, or NY and Philly, or NY and Boston, or NY and LA (and probably a few more) and its a different beast

Last edited by dingbat on Sun Jan 13, 2013 8:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

XxSpyKEx wrote:I do see your point re: not needing a car in Manhattan. But if it were cheaper and you wanted to leave NYC ever so often (say, e.g., twice a month),

why would you need (or want) to leave that often?

Hiking, camping, boating, jet-ski'ing, kayaking, dirt-biking, fishing, drag racing, road racing, shooting range, and the rest of the plethora of things you typically can't do in a large congested city. I don't know, as much as I enjoy living in a big city, I get claustrophobic and find myself needing to get away often.

These threads are always insufferable and the formula used by NALP is stupid for reasons stated ITT. I don't get why anybody would give enough of a shit to post the article except as a joke (though OP seems srs).

XxSpyKEx wrote:I do see your point re: not needing a car in Manhattan. But if it were cheaper and you wanted to leave NYC ever so often (say, e.g., twice a month),

why would you need (or want) to leave that often?

Hiking, camping, boating, jet-ski'ing, kayaking, dirt-biking, fishing, drag racing, road racing, shooting range, and the rest of the plethora of things you typically can't do in a large congested city. I don't know, as much as I enjoy living in a big city, I get claustrophobic and find myself needing to get away often.

Don't ever move to NYThat being said, boating and jet skiing can be done from the docks, fishing from the bridges, and there's at least one shooting range in the city. Cycling and hiking can be done in the park. During the winter there are plenty if organized ski trips and camping in thè summer. I don't know about motorized sports, but, this isn't NASCAR cuntry.